Only the Tories can save the UK

I see that the Tory proposal on the 2017 EU in/out referendum has been proposed to be held along the lines of standard normal UK general elections. In that EU residents are not permitted to votes on in this referendum.

Although this is a welcome decision (turkeys voting for Christmas) But I still suspect the lies & fear propaganda of loss of UK jobs with an EU exit will prevail.

In fact the UK will significantly better off outside the EU. First I love to see the fisheries industry expanded once the EU fascists are overthrown, then farming sector flourish without the forced import of EU meats. Then British Industrial sector improve without cheap migrant labour, that those workers & ourselves.

The biggest propaganda fear will be from many so called "big employers" threating to pull out of Britian if we leave the EU. This is from the same employers that were resident in Britian before the EEC, That are signatories to WTO & GATT & the same employers that said that the introduction of a minimum wage would force many of them to close down & abandon the UK .... None of those threats have come to pass!!!! So don't be fooled by their multi-national threats against EU exit either...


All they want is to keep wages down and keep the flow of cheap migrant workers flowing into Britian.

When the solution is to force the unemployed off State benefits (by the withdrawing of those benefits).

The idea of some work being something that British unemployed don't wish to take is over. Work or starve!

 

it's not the taxpayer's duty to pick up the tab - if she/he can't afford to pay staff min wage then she should cease trading

 

Just the point I am making, if you put the majority of small businesses out of business where else are you going to look for employment, some big multi-national that can fix prices?

Problem is with your trickle-down method, it simply does not work.

 

If you had read further replies from me you would have seen the one where I state my partner pays ABOVE the minimum wage to all her employees .. in fact quite a bit over the minimum wage.

 

Who said the "majority" ? No just the ones that can not survive. Over time new employment will be created by new businesses. If they can't survive, let them go under. New ones will replace them. The idea that only large multi-national Industries can provide the services the people need has been proved wrong time & time again. Just look at BT for one example.

Only a fool wants the reintroduction of large state controlled Industries, whether that be by ownership, at great cost to the tax payer, or by over excessive legislation.

Capitalism needs unemployed people to survive, it needs a good free flow of employment. Large Companies are an anathema to the free market liberal.

 

So this introduces the question, what is the difference between the "minimum wage" and the "living wage"?

From your previous post :


"my partner owns one, if she were forced to pay the current living wage she would cease trading"

So who defines the "living wage" & is it something we should be bothered about? What is the label "living wage"? Some new Fabian introduction, designed to destroy Capitalism?

It seems to me that the Fabians wish to introduce into the National physie that we "should care" about other people. Why is this? I don't care about anyone else other than myself & my family. Why should this attitude be considered wrong? Exactly Why?

 

in that case then what is the gripe? it's not like she's being forced to pay a min wage that she deems above what she can afford - so, she could always lower the wages if she wanted etc..

 

Or make some redundant, and get the remaining people to work harder.

 

The majority of small businesses would fail.
Just who is going to create this new employment, and what do the people put out of work do until when or if that happens, and even if there is enough new businesses starting to fill the gap they are going to have to charge more for their services in order to cover employment costs, as I said from my first comment, it is a myth to think that a living wage is going to change anything .. it won't, manufacturing and retail prices will rise to cover the extra wage payments ergo those receiving the living wage will be in a no better position than they are now.

furthermore I didn't say anything about large multi-national companies being better at providing services, I said they would be the only ones in a position to be able to provide them by absorbing the cost of the living wage or forcing source material prices down or increasing their retail prices to cover those wage increases.

 

The gripe is forcing small businesses to pay a wage that would render them unable to continue trading.

National minimum wage (21 and over) - £6.50 / hour
Living wage - £7.85 / hour

My partner employs 6 people, four of which are over 21 and she pays more than the minimum wage but less than the living wage, those 6, her and her business partner are the minimum number required in order for them to offer the services they do.

Should the living wage become the "new" minimum wage then yes she would be forced to pay above what she can afford, add to this the increase in the cost of the required supplies - which would happen because those manufacturers would also be forced to pay the "new" minimum wage and as such have to increase their prices - she would either have to increase her prices to counter the extra expenses and thus making her uncompetitive against big businesses ergo losing her trade or decide to stop, making 8 people (6 staff, her and her business partner) unemployed. The type of business my partner runs has very tight margins and that is true across the board for the sector she is in, in fact her yearly 'wage' is just below the local average wage for the area we live in of £19.5k and while some might say that even this wage is a lot higher than the people she employs, it is her money that is at risk should the business fail and she works on average a 60 hour week, so in reality her hourly rate of £6.25 / hour is LESS than the current minimum wage, on an hour to hour comparison she earns less than 4 of her employees who are all paid above the minimum wage for their age group.

The ideology of the living wage removing the working tax credits is a myth, it simply will not happen, prices will increase to counter the wage rises placing the people in exactly the same position as before, all it does is force inflation up and IMO that will lead to big multi-national businesses being the only ones capable of remaining trading and that is something I have no wish to see.

 

I cannot speak for other business sectors, the sector my partner trades in has very tight margins and her staff levels are at the minimum required in order to provide the services they do, they simply cannot reduce their workforce, to do so would be massively detrimental to the business requirements.

 

Then either the business will fail, due to over regulation by the Fabian/EU culture in which we live in Western Europe; or maybe there is some way of exploiting the system by employing people that are claiming unemployment benefits.

Either way, it just goes to show that the Fabians have all but destroyed our capitalist system. Which of course was their intention. Soon it will come to armed struggle with the free market against the socialist Fabian utopia ... Arm yourself & be prepared to eliminate socialists.

 

I need not remind you that the welfare state existed prior to the EU and was introduced by Attlee’s Labour government in 1945.

I have already tried to explain how a mandatory introduction of a living wage will not be the golden arrow so many think it will, all it will do is push up manufacturing costs due to raw material price increases and thus push up retail prices, making the living wage the new minimum wage assuming that the living wage will continue to increase to match retail prices then all it does is fuel inflation, and THAT will be the down fall of this country long before anything else.

I wish that there was a way to remove things like working tax credits, however the reality is that it cannot be done without a sustained period of deflation ergo reducing the cost of goods all the way back to the raw material prices, another factor that is seldom looked at is that businesses will look to technology to replace the worker - as happened in the car manufacturing sector and is still happening in the supermarket sector.

I am 100% for getting us out of the EU, I feel it has been nothing but a ball and chain around our necks add to this that we were lied to in the first place about what the common market was set to become.

 

Material prices is not the issue, it is labour costs ( wages & pensions ) that make British Industry uncompetitive in the so called globalised economy.

This is why import tariffs on all good should be imposed to help boost British Industry, along with strict immigration policies.

Demolition of 1960's architecture & culture - the reintroduction of Grammer school selection, the cane, hanging criminals & national service.

And horse-wiping all socialists, especially middle-class socialists before the any working class person, as it is these middle-class Bourgeoisie that are to blame for all the ills of Britain today.

 

Rubbish, material costs reflect the cost of sourcing them ergo the greater the demand of the workforce for higher pay the higher prices become to get them.

Import tariffs make us uncompetitive .. the common market approach was the right idea .. fully agree on the strict immigration policies.

I don't agree, the 1960's gave us some of the best free thinkers and innovators we have ever had, they removed the ideology that only the wealthy could become industry leaders.

Reintroduce Grammer schools for sure, but do not make them elitist, if someone can pass the equivalent of the 11 plus then they should go regardless of their wealth or social status, they should not be barred simply because the school sets high prices.

agreed

see no reason in this day and age for the death penalty not to be reintroduced in crimes where there is indisputable DNA evidence.

Yep, three years minimum.

 

Material costs are the same for China & India as they are for Britian.

What makes British Industry uncompetitive are the labour costs.

As for the 1960's it was the final decade that destroyed Britain. The idea that it gave us the fallacy that we had liberated ourselves from the old stuffy Edwardian World & its values & replaced them with nothing. It was the decade that hated Britain & all that we knew ourselves as & replaced it with self loathing.

 

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on these things.

 

Hasn't UKIP's immigration policy been accused of being racist?

 

This comment only make me believe that you can not back up your previously stated opinions!

For example "the 1960's gave us some of the best free thinkers and innovators we have ever had"

What a load of rubbish! The 18th & 19th Century gave us the best free thinking innovators, many from impoverished & humble backgrounds. Merchant adventurers made Britain great.

And although the writing was on the wall for British decline in the first part of the 20th Century. It was the ideals of the 60's that finished us off. And along with the 1960's ideas of hatred of Britain & what it stood for, they replaced it with nothing of any value.

Only small minded media-led fools think that the 1960's was some kind of hey-day for British culture. It was NOT. It was a decade of hatred & destruction of Britain from within.

 

You may believe as you wish, I know for a fact that nothing I state will ever shake you from your pre-concieved ideology.

It did.

So in your opinion all free thinking and innovations ceased after the 19th century